Well, the creative team of Cerebral Itch is married, so maybe THEY do make whoopie daily?
I don't know, if I was trying to celebrate Rachel Maddow this would not have been my angle. Her show is different, she's very intelligent, owns up to her mistakes, and she's not rude to her guests.
I wonder if she'll make a comment on the show about this.
i had to sit thru 'boys don't cry' with a barbaric 15 yr old last night. all i can say it.... we'll i can't get into this bc my blood pressure will spike and i might smack someone with my dildo.
This may be slightly off-topic, but isn't referring to a hetero woman as a "breeder" also pigeonholing someone for their sexuality? If it's not okay to make assumptions about lesbians' sexual proclivities- and obviously it's not- then why is it okay to refer to non-lesbian women as creatures that exist solely for reproduction?
Or am I the only person who finds that term dismissive?
@FullSpeedLohan: Me too. Seeing his Super Bowl footage, though, reminded how much of a GIANT he is. Not that I wouldn't bone him for democracy, though.
As a gay man I can tell you I have sex and jack off all day. Which is why I am in college and such. If this isn't making any sense thats becuz well it doesnt. (stars filming porn).
Fact: There are more gay Xtube accounts than hetero ones. Thus proving that the gays are more sexual.
@Tsar-Romanov: lol that was kind of the goal. to submit faulty logic. which thus proves that gays are sexualer than straights. and thus tying into rachel maddow um being w/e she is.
Well, all women, let's face it, want to fuck all men all the time. Lesbian women definitely want to fuck men, but screw other women just to titillate men, until a man comes along to turn them right. So, you understand now? Rachael Maddow wants to have a threesome with you, just because.
I see where you're coming from, Megan, but the cards aren't targeted to the "OMG lesbians are sooooo hot" Katy Perry/Abercrombie crowd. They're cards that girls send each other to laugh about their nerdy ladyboners...you know, like we do on Jezebel all the time.
@amowls: This kind of thing bugs me alot. I hate it when I hear people refer to "my Asian friend" or "my lesbian friend" or whatever other qualifier designates that person as Other. You'd never say "my white/heterosexual etc friend" so why would you say it about anyone else?
@Cerridwen: They say it that way bc their subconscious mind can only define those people as the Other, first. They may get to be defined as people afterwards. Possibly. Maybe. Probably not.
@oh.geez.: Exactly. I have started calling people out on this and they usually aren't aware of how they define anyone who is not white and heterosexual as [othering qualifier] first and person second.
@Cerridwen: I consistently do this with professions, to contextualize people. "My lawyer friend", "My FBI friend", "My model friend", "My design student friend".
I also live in DC, so this may just be a bad habit I have acquired.
I've had it up to here with the whole hetero-normative bullshit I've seen lately. I don't care what a journalist sexuality is so long as they are competent, engaging, and interesting.
Also, I'm counting down until we start to see the Maddow body snark disaster begin.
Why is it also that Rachel Maddow is everyone's go-to "I'm not gay, but..." lady? Nearly every time Jezebel posts about her, there is a barrage of, "Take me, Rachel, take me!" which I don't notice as much in posts about other prominent lesbians.
@Khrushchev: I dunno. Maybe cause Jezebel posts about Maddow a lot? If there were a post about Jodie Foster, I'd probably hijack the thread. I've been in love with her since I was about seven.
@morninggloria: Yeah, but I'm saying that straight women on this site objectify her the way they would a man. The Rachel Maddow posts (which are often about actual issues) have similar comments as the Clive Owen SJs.
@amazoncowgirl: I've had a thing for Jodie Foster since she was Eleanor Arroway in "Contact." I loved the book and she was the perfect Dr. Arroway. Sigh.
@Khrushchev: I was just thinking that myself. It strikes me as funny that Jezebelles are getting up in arms about these cards when they are probably some of the most vocal in their lady-bonering about her. But we do that a lot here. It's the old "I can talk shit about my mom, but you better no got there bish" game. Only instead of talking shit, it's talking lust.
@Khrushchev: @wedropscience: Yeah, I think it's been said already but I think it's as simple as straight girls tend to go for chicks who look like boys.
@AuntieBee: I just think it's telling that a lot of the reactions here are about men and lesbians, when I've seen more straight women lust after her than anything.
@Khrushchev: It parallels what I hate most about the Obama posts as well. People see the pic, read the headline, ignore the post, and get right down to the sexy (or in some cases OMG puppies!).
Then when called on it (sexy comments), it becomes about intellectual power, admiration of character, and whatnot.
I'm not sure if I agree that her sexual orientation makes her an object of lust. I'd understand if the image was more explicit, but it just looks like a cheeky cartoon to me. I dunno if I'd care more or less if Maddow were replaced with Brown.
Whether she was a lesbian or not, I'd still be into her as a hetero-woman for her brains and poise.
If it were Anderson Cooper in that e-card, would this be a non-issue?
@andheartss haz it: Nope. It would go to the whole glass closet mess that (depending on your take)overshadows his actual work (which I usually find pretty engaging).
02/04/09
[www.nytimes.com]
02/04/09
I don't know, if I was trying to celebrate Rachel Maddow this would not have been my angle. Her show is different, she's very intelligent, owns up to her mistakes, and she's not rude to her guests.
I wonder if she'll make a comment on the show about this.
02/04/09
02/04/09
Or am I the only person who finds that term dismissive?
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
Fact: There are more gay Xtube accounts than hetero ones. Thus proving that the gays are more sexual.
02/04/09
Logic, you're doing it wrong.
02/04/09
gay generalizing via society im doing it right!
02/04/09
02/04/09
Wait. What?
02/04/09
02/04/09
THEY'RE NOT EVEN FUNNY. BEING FUNNY IS THE LEAST YOU COULD DO.
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
I also live in DC, so this may just be a bad habit I have acquired.
02/04/09
Also, I'm counting down until we start to see the Maddow body snark disaster begin.
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
Boyfriend says she looks like a very pretty man, so women want her.
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
@AuntieBee: I just think it's telling that a lot of the reactions here are about men and lesbians, when I've seen more straight women lust after her than anything.
02/04/09
Then when called on it (sexy comments), it becomes about intellectual power, admiration of character, and whatnot.
02/04/09
And you know, I might even be alright with that if it wasn't accompanied by indignant huffiness when it comes from someone else.
02/04/09
02/04/09
Whether she was a lesbian or not, I'd still be into her as a hetero-woman for her brains and poise.
If it were Anderson Cooper in that e-card, would this be a non-issue?
02/04/09